Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Environmental Ethics in Mahayana Buddhism
Environmental Ethics in Mahayana Buddhism
Shuichi Yamamoto
Introduction
137
J/Orient/02 03.1.17 1:26 PM ページ 138
results in removing pain from all sentient beings. This means that devel-
oping ethical norms and plans of action based on Buddhist practices not
only leads to solving environmental problems but also simultaneously
fulfills the purpose of Buddhism. In this paper, I will discuss environ-
mental problems related to living things, and examine how an ethical
norm that accords with Buddhism could be created.
WISDOM
The attainment of wisdom (prajñå-påramitå) is part of the six kinds of
practices by which a bodhisattva attains enlightenment (sat påramitåh).
This concept originally referred to the attainment of absolute wisdom
(prajñå-påramitå). Here, I would like to examine the idea of wisdom in
relation to two fundamental Buddhist concepts as a way to solve envi-
ronmental problems. They are “dependent origination” (prat¥tya-
samutpåda) and “the middle way.”
J/Orient/02 03.1.17 1:26 PM ページ 143
killing of animals the less heavy crime of the three. This hierarchy in
the seriousness of killing also depicts how Buddhism ranks the value of
different life forms.
Therefore, although in principle all lives are regarded as equal in
Buddhism, the value of human life is regarded is higher than that of
other living things. I believe this means that although Buddhism is
based on the spirit of egalitarianism priority is still given to human life.
ate the causes, conditions, methods, or karma of killing, and shall not
intentionally kill any living creature. As a Buddha’s disciple, he ought
to nurture a mind of compassion and filial piety, always devising expe-
dient means to rescue and protect all beings. If instead, he fails to
restrain himself and kills sentient beings without mercy he commits a
Parajika21 (major) offense.”22
This precept forbids the killing of any living thing, and further adds
that although killing itself is an offense; the state of mind of the person
at the time of the killing, i.e. whether a person kills intentionally or for
no apparent reason, determines the graveness of the offense. Therefore,
it is an offense to kill a living thing, but it is a major offense if “he fails
to restrain himself and kills sentient beings without mercy,” or out of
pleasure. This ethical standard of Buddhism described in the precept of
“not killing living things” can be used as the basis for solving problems
or dilemmas related to the killing of living things.
The Precept of “Not Stealing”
The “Second Major Precept on Stealing” of the Brahma-net Sutra
states:
“A disciple of the Buddha must not himself steal or encourage others
to steal, steal by expedient means, steal by means of incantation or
deviant mantras. He should not create the causes, conditions, methods,
or karma of stealing. No valuables or possessions, even those belonging
to ghosts and spirits or thieves and robbers, be they as small as a needle
or blade of grass, should be intentionally stolen. As a Buddha’s disciple,
he ought to have a mind of mercy, compassion, and filial piety—always
helping people earn merits and achieve happiness. If instead, he steals
the possessions of others, he commits a Parajika offense.”23
This precept also forbids stealing especially when it is done inten-
tionally (without reason). Since the standard of judgment is based on
the life-state of a bodhisattva, which is to help people earn merits and
achieve happiness, stealing is regarded as of gravest consequence (a
Parajka offense). In today’s world it is necessary to interpret this pre-
cept more widely and consider it an offense to not only steal from other
human beings but also from nature, or the ecosystem.
The Meaning of Keeping Precepts
In considering environmental problems, it is helpful to examine the
characteristics of Buddhist precepts, that is, the meaning and the role of
keeping such precepts. Many of the precepts, such as the ten major pre-
cepts, and the forty eight light percepts of the Brahma-net Sutra, regu-
J/Orient/02 03.1.17 1:26 PM ページ 147
the offense “he fails to restrain himself and kills sentient beings without
mercy” described in the precept on “not killing living things.” More-
over, if developed countries exploit local peoples for the sake of obtain-
ing wealth, this would correspond to the offense described as “rejoice at
witness killing” also expounded in the percept on “not killing living
things.” Therefore, when a consumer pursues a comfortable or prof-
itable life, self-control that prevents him or her from becoming ‘greedy’
is a must. This should be the basis of a Buddhist ethical norm.
Conclusion
The view of Buddhist ethics with regards to living things, as I have
mentioned, depicts actions based on wisdom of dependent origination
and of the middle way. The pursuit of profit has been discussed as being
neither confirmed nor dinied. However, as living things are usually only
beneficial for human beings, we have to examine what we are able to
give in return.
J/Orient/02 03.1.17 1:26 PM ページ 153
Acknowledgements
I wish to express my gratitude to Anne Mette Fisker-Nielsen for edit-
ing the English version of this article.
I also express my gratitude to Dr. Mike Curtis for reading this article
and providing some useful comments.
NOTES
1
Kato, Hisatake (1991), Kankyo Rinrigaku No Susume, (Introduction to Environ-
mental Ethics), Maruzen, Tokyo, 1991
2
Yamamoto, Shuichi (1998), “Contribution of Buddhism to Environmental
Thoughts,” The Journal of Oriental Studies, vol. 8, 144–173.
3
Yamamoto, Shuichi (1998), “Kankyo-rinri to Bukkyou no Kadai” (Environmental
Ethics and Issues of Buddhism), Nihon Indo-gaku Bukkyo-gaku Kenkyu (The Journal of
India and Buddhist Studies), vol. 47, No. 2, 78–84
4
Yamamoto, Shuichi (1993), “Seibutsu-hogo notameno Rinri to Kyouiku (1)”
(Ethics and Education for Biological Conservation (1)), The Bulletin of Institute of Ori-
ental Philosophy, vol. 9, 59–81.
5
I am here using the word ‘bio-intensity’ to refer to the quantity of living things in a
given environment
6
Carson, Rachel (1987), Chinmoku no Haru, Shincho-sha (in Japanese), (Silent
Spring, 1962, Houghton Mifflin Company.)
7
Colborn, Theo (1997), Our Stolen Future, Abacus, (translated in Japanese,
(Ubawaresi Mirai, Shoueisha, 1997)
8
Cadbury, Deborah (1997), The Feminization of Nature: Our Future at Risk, (Mesu-
ka-suru Sizen, Shuei-sha, 1998) Hamish Halilton.
9
Singer Peter ed. (1985), In Defence of Animals (Doubutsu no Kenri, Gijutsu to Nin-
gen-sha, 1986) Basil Blackwell.
10
Ibid.
11
Statistics and Information, 2001, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of
Japan (2002). http://www.maff.go.jp
12
See endnote 9.
13
See endnote 2.
14
Hirakawa, Akira (1998), Dajou Bukkyo Nyumon (Introduction to Mahayana bud-
dhism), Daisan Bunmei-sha, Tokyo.
15
Anågåmin (in Sanskrit) means the third degree of the four degrees to be attained by
a follower of Hinayana Buddhism.
16
Arhat (in Sanskrit) is a person who is freed from all craving and rebirth, and is one
of the ten appellations of the Buddha.
17
Pratyekabuddha (in Sanskrit) is a person who is a self-enlightened Buddha.
18
Av¥chi Hell means the worst kind of hell, where sinners suffer interminable pain.
J/Orient/02 03.1.17 1:26 PM ページ 155